Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 11:28:58AM +, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > Michael Niedermayer niedermayer.cc> writes: > > > pushed > > Thank you, this really helps a lot! > Is there a reason why you added no tags for > 0.9-dev and 0.10-dev? > And could we add an additional n2.0-dev > that points to the same revision as n1.3-dev? i can, but ill wait a bit as i cant remove these once they are added so if someone thinks this is a bad idea, speak now or its too late ... also please ping this in a few days, i will forget [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Those who are best at talking, realize last or never when they are wrong. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
Michael Niedermayer niedermayer.cc> writes: > pushed Thank you, this really helps a lot! Is there a reason why you added no tags for 0.9-dev and 0.10-dev? And could we add an additional n2.0-dev that points to the same revision as n1.3-dev? Carl Eugen ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 05:45:01AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 07:12:56PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > Hi > > > > Should we add git tags to the revissions where releases are branched > > off ? > > > > that way a "git describe" on master would look like: > > n2.5-dev-3-gb227be3 > > instead of: > > n2.0-11670-gb227be3 > > > > (or any other tag than n2.5-dev that we choose) > > > > it would not affect the "./version.sh" output > > > > -- > > Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB > > > > The real ebay dictionary, page 2 > > "100% positive feedback" - "All either got their money back or didnt > > complain" > > "Best seller ever, very honest" - "Seller refunded buyer after failed scam" > > heres a list of commands that adds these tags locally > please check and comment > if i hear no objections then i will push these in a week or 2 > > note the tags always use ++minor, that is for consistency because at > the time after a branch we generally do not yet know if the next > release will be a minor or major one > > > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/0.10 branched off' > -a n0.11-dev 01fcbdf9cedcf14418b5886205261e532167f949 > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/0.11 branched off' > -a n0.12-dev c0b47d1914a19abacdf1edf081cbf07485952920 > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/1.0 branched off' > -a n1.1-dev b4c753487cf819213740d39c49b7bdc45338305d > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/1.1 branched off' > -a n1.2-dev a2aeaff40f34cb54bef55240f9cb8046385087d7 > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/1.2 branched off' > -a n1.3-dev 80f91a70be5f03fc95eb89d222d760eeaf91b135 > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.0 branched off' > -a n2.1-dev a37e42b3ee4226a4d2c69cd4eebf9c81e6df8ea5 > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.1 branched off' > -a n2.2-dev 6baf9c4406bcdf1015c9ec8bd6b8c4aef77624ac > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.2 branched off' > -a n2.3-dev 3ec3f70ddb1b97fd6174ab3ca8617d8a1a6516ab > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.3 branched off' > -a n2.4-dev 13a72d9b08c914c3d3c99be1053e9d5cda8baa88 > git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.4 branched off' > -a n2.5-dev da2186be81b5cb2d24da5671e25affbb8f09920d pushed [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB He who knows, does not speak. He who speaks, does not know. -- Lao Tsu signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 07:12:56PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > Hi > > Should we add git tags to the revissions where releases are branched > off ? > > that way a "git describe" on master would look like: > n2.5-dev-3-gb227be3 > instead of: > n2.0-11670-gb227be3 > > (or any other tag than n2.5-dev that we choose) > > it would not affect the "./version.sh" output > > -- > Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB > > The real ebay dictionary, page 2 > "100% positive feedback" - "All either got their money back or didnt complain" > "Best seller ever, very honest" - "Seller refunded buyer after failed scam" heres a list of commands that adds these tags locally please check and comment if i hear no objections then i will push these in a week or 2 note the tags always use ++minor, that is for consistency because at the time after a branch we generally do not yet know if the next release will be a minor or major one git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/0.10 branched off' -a n0.11-dev 01fcbdf9cedcf14418b5886205261e532167f949 git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/0.11 branched off' -a n0.12-dev c0b47d1914a19abacdf1edf081cbf07485952920 git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/1.0 branched off' -a n1.1-dev b4c753487cf819213740d39c49b7bdc45338305d git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/1.1 branched off' -a n1.2-dev a2aeaff40f34cb54bef55240f9cb8046385087d7 git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/1.2 branched off' -a n1.3-dev 80f91a70be5f03fc95eb89d222d760eeaf91b135 git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.0 branched off' -a n2.1-dev a37e42b3ee4226a4d2c69cd4eebf9c81e6df8ea5 git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.1 branched off' -a n2.2-dev 6baf9c4406bcdf1015c9ec8bd6b8c4aef77624ac git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.2 branched off' -a n2.3-dev 3ec3f70ddb1b97fd6174ab3ca8617d8a1a6516ab git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.3 branched off' -a n2.4-dev 13a72d9b08c914c3d3c99be1053e9d5cda8baa88 git tag -m 'Main development, master branch after release/2.4 branched off' -a n2.5-dev da2186be81b5cb2d24da5671e25affbb8f09920d [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Many things microsoft did are stupid, but not doing something just because microsoft did it is even more stupid. If everything ms did were stupid they would be bankrupt already. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 08:46:48PM -0700, Timothy Gu wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > Michael Niedermayer gmx.at> writes: > > > >> Should we add git tags to the revissions where > >> releases are branched off ? > > > > Yes please, this would make my life much easier. > > > > n2.5-dev sounds ok. > > Ping. Personally I think we should use n2.4-post, as it is more > consistent with RELEASE file, and doesn't have the ambiguity that > comes with "dev" (i.e. does 2.5-dev < 2.5 ? or > 2.5?). > -dev is a very common convention. [...] -- Clément B. pgpsBRy1gULbd.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > Michael Niedermayer gmx.at> writes: > >> Should we add git tags to the revissions where >> releases are branched off ? > > Yes please, this would make my life much easier. > > n2.5-dev sounds ok. Ping. Personally I think we should use n2.4-post, as it is more consistent with RELEASE file, and doesn't have the ambiguity that comes with "dev" (i.e. does 2.5-dev < 2.5 ? or > 2.5?). Libav is recently considering to use Semantic Versioning (semver.org), which demands "2.5-dev". To fully comply with semver, we also need to change first release of a branch to "2.4.0" instead of "2.4," which I am not sure if that's what everybody wants. Timothy ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
Michael Niedermayer gmx.at> writes: > Should we add git tags to the revissions where > releases are branched off ? Yes please, this would make my life much easier. n2.5-dev sounds ok. Carl Eugen ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 02:13:27PM +0200, wm4 wrote: > On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 23:36:14 +0200 > Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 07:31:42PM +0200, wm4 wrote: > > > On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 19:12:56 +0200 > > > Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > Should we add git tags to the revissions where releases are branched > > > > off ? > > > > > > > > that way a "git describe" on master would look like: > > > > n2.5-dev-3-gb227be3 > > > > instead of: > > > > n2.0-11670-gb227be3 > > > > > > > > (or any other tag than n2.5-dev that we choose) > > > > > > > > it would not affect the "./version.sh" output > > > > > > > > > > That sounds like an interesting idea. But just using the release tag > > > name and appending "-dev" might be harmful for scripts which try to > > > automatically pickup the latest version or such. > > > > what tag name would you suggest ? > > (note we cannot really change it once we create and push these tags) > > > > [...] > > Don't know. Maybe "dev-n2.5" or "after-n2.5" I'm not sure. I prefer -dev as suffix, in case someone wants to make a small bikeshed vote. -- Clément B. pgphB8_HPBM9I.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 23:36:14 +0200 Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 07:31:42PM +0200, wm4 wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 19:12:56 +0200 > > Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > > > > Hi > > > > > > Should we add git tags to the revissions where releases are branched > > > off ? > > > > > > that way a "git describe" on master would look like: > > > n2.5-dev-3-gb227be3 > > > instead of: > > > n2.0-11670-gb227be3 > > > > > > (or any other tag than n2.5-dev that we choose) > > > > > > it would not affect the "./version.sh" output > > > > > > > That sounds like an interesting idea. But just using the release tag > > name and appending "-dev" might be harmful for scripts which try to > > automatically pickup the latest version or such. > > what tag name would you suggest ? > (note we cannot really change it once we create and push these tags) > > [...] Don't know. Maybe "dev-n2.5" or "after-n2.5" I'm not sure. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 07:31:42PM +0200, wm4 wrote: > On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 19:12:56 +0200 > Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > > Hi > > > > Should we add git tags to the revissions where releases are branched > > off ? > > > > that way a "git describe" on master would look like: > > n2.5-dev-3-gb227be3 > > instead of: > > n2.0-11670-gb227be3 > > > > (or any other tag than n2.5-dev that we choose) > > > > it would not affect the "./version.sh" output > > > > That sounds like an interesting idea. But just using the release tag > name and appending "-dev" might be harmful for scripts which try to > automatically pickup the latest version or such. what tag name would you suggest ? (note we cannot really change it once we create and push these tags) [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Its not that you shouldnt use gotos but rather that you should write readable code and code with gotos often but not always is less readable signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 19:12:56 +0200 Michael Niedermayer wrote: > Hi > > Should we add git tags to the revissions where releases are branched > off ? > > that way a "git describe" on master would look like: > n2.5-dev-3-gb227be3 > instead of: > n2.0-11670-gb227be3 > > (or any other tag than n2.5-dev that we choose) > > it would not affect the "./version.sh" output > That sounds like an interesting idea. But just using the release tag name and appending "-dev" might be harmful for scripts which try to automatically pickup the latest version or such. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
[FFmpeg-devel] Branchpoint tags
Hi Should we add git tags to the revissions where releases are branched off ? that way a "git describe" on master would look like: n2.5-dev-3-gb227be3 instead of: n2.0-11670-gb227be3 (or any other tag than n2.5-dev that we choose) it would not affect the "./version.sh" output -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB The real ebay dictionary, page 2 "100% positive feedback" - "All either got their money back or didnt complain" "Best seller ever, very honest" - "Seller refunded buyer after failed scam" signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
